| Literature DB >> 32894140 |
Mette Hansen1, Mikkel Oxfeldt2, Anne E Larsen2, Lise S Thomsen3, Torben Rokkedal-Lausch4, Britt Christensen5, Nikolaj Rittig5,6, Frank V De Paoli7, Jens Bangsbo8, Niels Ørtenblad3, Klavs Madsen2,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Protein supplementation has been suggested to augment endurance training adaptations by increasing mixed muscle and myofibrillar protein synthesis and lean body mass. However, a potential beneficial effect on mitochondrial adaptations is yet to be clarified. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of consuming whey protein hydrolysate before and whey protein hydrolysate plus carbohydrate (PRO-CHO) after each exercise session during a six-week training period compared to similarly timed intake of isocaloric CHO supplements on biomarkers of mitochondrial biogenesis, VO2max and performance in trained runners.Entities:
Keywords: Endurance sport; Enzyme activity; Mitochondria; Performance; Protein hydrolysate; Skeletal muscle; Sports nutrition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32894140 PMCID: PMC7487963 DOI: 10.1186/s12970-020-00376-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Soc Sports Nutr ISSN: 1550-2783 Impact factor: 5.150
Fig. 1Schematic overview of the study protocol
Baseline characteristics
| PRO-CHO ( | CHO ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (yrs) | 30 ± 9 | 31 ± 10 |
| Sex (M/F) | 11 M 1F | 11 M 1F |
| Weight (kg) | 70.1 ± 7.7 | 74.1 ± 7.4 |
| Height (m) | 182 ± 6 | 181 ± 5 |
| BMI (kg m− 2) | 21.2 ± 1.4 | 22.6 ± 1.6 |
| Body fat (%) | 7.6 ± 3.4 | 9.7 ± 4.0 |
| VO2max (ml O2 min− 1 kg− 1) | 61.6 ± 6.5 | 60.0 ± 6.0 |
| 6 K TT (min:sec) | 22:28 ± 1:47 | 23:05 ± 1:17 |
Data presented as mean ± SD. No significant difference between groups was detected
Average training volume pr. week
| CHO ( | PRO-CHO ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Low (65–80% HRmax)(min) | 148 ± 33 | 133 ± 21 | 0.73 |
| Moderate (81–88% HRmax)(min) | 83 ± 6 | 100 ± 18 | 0.44 |
| High (89–100% HRmax) (min) | 39 ± 5 | 45 ± 7 | 0.50 |
| Total (min) | 262 ± 35 | 278 ± 40 | 0.77 |
| Low (65–80% HRmax)(min) | 106 ± 10 | 100 ± 11 | 0.74 |
| Moderate (81–88% HRmax)(min) | 85 ± 6 | 80 ± 6 | 0.61 |
| High (89–100% HRmax) (min) | 39 ± 5 | 41 ± 6 | 0.73 |
| Total (min) | 229 ± 15 | 221 ± 18 | 0.77 |
Data presented as mean ± SEM
Fig. 2Western blot data for (a) Cytochrome C (Cyt C), (b) Voltage-dependent anion channel (VDAC), (c) Heat Shock Protein 60 (HSP60), (d) Prohibitin (PHB1), (e) Cytochrome C Oxidase (COX-IV), (f) Succinate dehydrogenase (SDHA), (g,h) Representative western blots. * significant difference from baseline p < 0.05. Data shown as median ± upper/lower quantile and minimum and maximum. (CHO n = 12, PRO-CHO n = 12)
Fig. 3(a) HAD and (b) CS enzyme (activity μmol g d.w.− 1 min− 1) at baseline and after six weeks of intervention in CHO (n = 12) and PRO-CHO (n = 12). ** significant difference from baseline p < 0.01. Data are presented as mean ± SEM
Fig. 4(a) 6 K Time Trial (PRO-CHO; CHO) at baseline (n = 22), midway (n = 21) and post the intervention period (n = 21). Data is missing from 1 matched pair (n = 2), due to improper execution of the test. Furthermore, one subject did not complete the Midway and Posttest due to small injury not affecting the training. (b) VO2max before (n = 24) and after intervention (n = 23). One subject is missing posttest due to lower back problems. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 ***p < 0.001 significant improvement from baseline
Energy and nutrient intake
| PRO-CHO ( | CHO ( | |
|---|---|---|
| BMRest (MJ d− 1) | 7.1 ± 0.7 | 7.1 ± 1.2 |
| EI (MJ d− 1) | 11.1 ± 2.0 | 11.0 ± 1.4 |
| EI (Kcal d− 1) | 2651 ± 477 | 2627 ± 334 |
| EI/BMRest | 1.55 ± 0.20 | 1.48 ± 0.19 |
| Protein (g d− 1) | 113 ± 34 | 106 ± 19 |
| Protein (g kg− 1 d− 1) | 1.59 ± 0.42 | 1.42 ± 0.25 |
| Protein (E%) | 17 ± 2 | 17 ± 2 |
| CHO (E%) | 52 ± 9 | 54 ± 6 |
| Fat (%) | 31 ± 9 | 30 ± 6 |
Data is shown as mean ± SD. Average daily energy intake and nutrient intake based on 2*4 days food registration in week 1 and 6. BMRest: Basal Metabolic Rate. EI: Energy Intake per day. CHO: carbohydrate. E%: % of total daily energy intake. No significant difference between groups was detected in the tested parameters (p > 0.26–0.93)